Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Caelestis Impius · 06-26-2002, 10:52 PM

My first post has to be about this....

The way I see it, Newdow means well, he just doesn't really understand the way things work. I'm truly afraid that he'll go off on some talkshow ranting and raving and simply runing any good that he has done.

On another note (and one just as disquieting) I fear that this is all playing into the ultra-conservative-christians' hands. This allows them to prove to that the 'evil atheist communist conspericy that intends on destroying the nation and doing other really bad stuff' that they had, under the great leadership of Trinity (McCarthy, Nixon, and Reagan), quelled, has risen again

This could then be used to revert to McCarthyite politics and stuff....

[ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: Caelestis Impius ]

Autonemesis · 06-26-2002, 11:31 PM

An exchange on Yahoo:

Other Guy: think about this....what if there isn't a God what is the worst thing that can happen to someone who believes there is? Nothing we will all have the same fate. Ah but what if there is a God? I know what my fate will be it will be in heaven but what will nonbelievers fates be? Are you willing to take that chance? And besides in the mean time we christians at least live with the belief and hope that there is something better than this world in the end. How sad and hopeless a life you must lead if you honestly believe that this is as good as it gets.......because frankly this world sucks. We should all thank God that we live in a country where we can express our views freely no matter how wrong they are.

Kind Bud: A belief system that speaks of "another world" - which incidentally, you will only get to when you die - as more important than this one, cannot be good for the world today. This is not an empty statement, we see this still happening today.

Other Guy: Just because it's not good for the world doesn't mean it's not true.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Skeptictank · 06-27-2002, 01:00 AM

Holy macaroni!
I come in this morning and see this topic is aready at 13 pages! WOW! I'm kinda sorry I'm over in Germany where I can't really witness the bruhaha on TV. Pity. But I AM glad I will be living in DC for the Godless march in Nov.

Just gotta lend my support to the 9th circuit and say that I cannot see how SCOTUS could overturn this one. I mean if the 1st amendment is clear on ONE thing its that CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION!!! ...and what happened in 1954 with the pledge?
CONGRESS MADE A FUCKING LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.
People are suddenly shocked that they've been called on this one?!
<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

BTW: If they were to remove the "under god" bit, could they require everyone to say the old pledge in schools? It would no way be a prayer then after all.

SanDiegoAtheist · 06-27-2002, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by gilly54:
Our Senator Dianne Feinstein just said on CNN that she thought the court ruling was "an embarrassment".

<a href="http://feinstein.senate.gov/contact.html" target="_blank">http://feinstein.senate.gov/contact.html</a>

I told her that rather than being an embarrassment, I was PROUD to live in a state whose judges uphold the law. I told her that now is a good time for the House and Senate to purge all religious items, such as the "In God we Trust" from our money, our taxes going to pay for a Senate Chaplain, and swearing on the Bible to uphold the Constitution. Jeez, they should swear on the Constitution to uphold the Constitution!
Any other Californian atheists care to join me?

Gilly

Believe me, Sen. Feinstein has already heard from me on this issue.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist...

who will no longer vote for Sen. Feinstein if she continues on this path. Time for me to jump ship to a party that supports the First Amendment otherwise.

ashibaka · 06-27-2002, 02:10 AM

Just saw a live discussion on Fox. Boy, they can really make a complete and total arse out of themselves when they want to.

"He can be an atheist if he wants to; he can be a nutcase if he wants to; but it's wrong for him to shovel it down the throat of his daughter like that. And if he doesn't like this country, he can just leave."

"He equated 'under God' to 'under Zeus'. 'Zeus'. You know, I think there ought to be comprehension tests for judges once they reach a certain age. He's what, 75 now?"

"You know, the establishment clause calls for 'freedom OF religion', not 'freedom FROM religion'. "

"Why don't they take out the references to God in the Constitution, like, uh, [train of thought falls into pithole] . . . the Year of our Lord 1776?"

I don't even need to point out the fallacies (at least, I hope not).

[ June 27, 2002: Message edited by: ashibaka ]

braces_for_impact · 06-27-2002, 02:24 AM

When I first awoke to this news, I was overjoyed at what appeared to be rational thinking taking place in the US judicial system. I went to bed early last night, and was sorry to have missed the general hubb-bub on television concerning the issue.

Now, as I scour news sites, message boards, etc, I have become very dissapointed. Looking at the various quotes from our "all wise leaders" has convinced me now, more than ever, of the need to fight bigotry and to protect the minority. I was taught in early school of the need for a checks and balances system. Now we have meaningless and unlawful conduct by congress in an attempt to overturn a precedent set that was a result of that checks an balances system. Judges are supposed to be unnacountable to cogrss and protected from the Legislative and Enforcement branches of the United States. I'm personally ashamed that congress could move so quiclky at the behest of "god" but could not move so swiftly to protect American Citizens from terrorism, both domestic and abroad.

I fear that this, combined with other new idealism that is beginning to wear away our personal freedoms in the aftermath of Sept. 11th will override our commen sense.

Though I applaud the circuit court of appeals' decision, I fear this is a badly chosen battle, and it so far is being used to target another specific minority group with the aim to make them appear less than human, and thus, unworthy of those inalienable human rights.

06-27-2002, 02:40 AM

Some bimbo on the Fox News morning show just said that she was "disturbed" that Newdow would raise his daughter as an atheist. She said that he shouldn't "force" it on her.

Can you imagine the uproar if she had said that about a Xian parent raising a Xian child?!?

C-Span is even worse. They're showing yesterday's Senate proceedings on the subject, and senator after senator is going on and on about how this is a country founded under god, we love god, god bless America, god doesn't like the ruling blah blah blah. That old fool Robert Byrd was practically foaming at the mouth about how the atheists are ruining his great country. At the end of his speech he yelled "blessed is the nation with the LORD as its god!"

I fear that church/state separation may be a thing of the past. The fundies are pissed!!!

ashibaka · 06-27-2002, 03:15 AM

They're still going on about it on Fox 30 min. later? Woah! Hopefully, it's a rerun O.o

What I found most disturbing this morning was the video of all the senators saying the Pledge. "I pledge allegiance, etc, one nation, UNDER GOD!!!, invisible, etc etc." They put so much emphasis on it that it sounded like they were ready to murder all those un-American atheists.

Bill · 06-27-2002, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeptictank:
BTW: If they were to remove the "under god" bit, could they require everyone to say the old pledge in schools? It would no way be a prayer then after all.

NO!

The US Supreme Court case that decided you had a right to not say the pledge if the school district said you had to was decided years before Congress inserted the words "under God" into the Pledge. See <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=US&vol=319&invol=624" target="_blank">West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette</a>, 319 U.S. 624, 63 S.Ct. 1178 (June 14, 1943).

== Bill

Bill Snedden · 06-27-2002, 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill:
The Congress prescribed that a belief that our nation was "under God" was part of our patriotic duty to this country, and that belief was to be expressed every time patriotic events occur. What could be a more egregious violation of the above language?

I quite agree. I think my point must not have been clear.

IMHO, the only argument remaining by which to attack this ruling is that the "under god" bit is now part of tradition, and as such has a secular purpose. This is what I meant by referring to the de minimis argument. Essentially, it concedes that the issue in question is a technical violation, but deems it permissible based on the "minimal" nature of any possible harm and the overall good that comes from allowing tradition to continue.

IIRC, it was this same argument that was used to justify continuing the Congressional chaplaincy.

That is the argument that I believe is flawed. Not only because two wrongs don't make a right (a "technical violation" is still a violation), but also for the very reasons you mention: the harm is not at all minimal, but goes to the very heart of the foundation upon which this nation is based. If our Constitution guarantees the right of non-belief, how can the official pledge to uphold that Constitution contain a mandatory reference to a deity in which we are not required by law to believe?

Regards,

Bill Snedden

06-26-2002, 10:52 PM	#301
Caelestis Impius Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 23	My first post has to be about this.... The way I see it, Newdow means well, he just doesn't really understand the way things work. I'm truly afraid that he'll go off on some talkshow ranting and raving and simply runing any good that he has done. On another note (and one just as disquieting) I fear that this is all playing into the ultra-conservative-christians' hands. This allows them to prove to that the 'evil atheist communist conspericy that intends on destroying the nation and doing other really bad stuff' that they had, under the great leadership of Trinity (McCarthy, Nixon, and Reagan), quelled, has risen again This could then be used to revert to McCarthyite politics and stuff.... [ June 26, 2002: Message edited by: Caelestis Impius ]</p>

06-27-2002, 02:10 AM	#305
ashibaka Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Cloudy Water Posts: 443	Just saw a live discussion on Fox. Boy, they can really make a complete and total arse out of themselves when they want to. "He can be an atheist if he wants to; he can be a nutcase if he wants to; but it's wrong for him to shovel it down the throat of his daughter like that. And if he doesn't like this country, he can just leave." "He equated 'under God' to 'under Zeus'. 'Zeus'. You know, I think there ought to be comprehension tests for judges once they reach a certain age. He's what, 75 now?" "You know, the establishment clause calls for 'freedom OF religion', not 'freedom FROM religion'. " "Why don't they take out the references to God in the Constitution, like, uh, [train of thought falls into pithole] . . . the Year of our Lord 1776?" I don't even need to point out the fallacies (at least, I hope not). [ June 27, 2002: Message edited by: ashibaka ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-26-2002, 11:31 PM	#302
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	An exchange on Yahoo: Other Guy: think about this....what if there isn't a God what is the worst thing that can happen to someone who believes there is? Nothing we will all have the same fate. Ah but what if there is a God? I know what my fate will be it will be in heaven but what will nonbelievers fates be? Are you willing to take that chance? And besides in the mean time we christians at least live with the belief and hope that there is something better than this world in the end. How sad and hopeless a life you must lead if you honestly believe that this is as good as it gets.......because frankly this world sucks. We should all thank God that we live in a country where we can express our views freely no matter how wrong they are. Kind Bud: A belief system that speaks of "another world" - which incidentally, you will only get to when you die - as more important than this one, cannot be good for the world today. This is not an empty statement, we see this still happening today. Other Guy: Just because it's not good for the world doesn't mean it's not true. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

06-27-2002, 01:00 AM	#303
Skeptictank Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: CONUS Posts: 901	Holy macaroni! I come in this morning and see this topic is aready at 13 pages! WOW! I'm kinda sorry I'm over in Germany where I can't really witness the bruhaha on TV. Pity. But I AM glad I will be living in DC for the Godless march in Nov. Just gotta lend my support to the 9th circuit and say that I cannot see how SCOTUS could overturn this one. I mean if the 1st amendment is clear on ONE thing its that CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION!!! ...and what happened in 1954 with the pledge? CONGRESS MADE A FUCKING LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION. People are suddenly shocked that they've been called on this one?! <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> BTW: If they were to remove the "under god" bit, could they require everyone to say the old pledge in schools? It would no way be a prayer then after all.

06-27-2002, 02:24 AM	#306
braces_for_impact Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In a nondescript, black helicopter. Posts: 6,637	When I first awoke to this news, I was overjoyed at what appeared to be rational thinking taking place in the US judicial system. I went to bed early last night, and was sorry to have missed the general hubb-bub on television concerning the issue. Now, as I scour news sites, message boards, etc, I have become very dissapointed. Looking at the various quotes from our "all wise leaders" has convinced me now, more than ever, of the need to fight bigotry and to protect the minority. I was taught in early school of the need for a checks and balances system. Now we have meaningless and unlawful conduct by congress in an attempt to overturn a precedent set that was a result of that checks an balances system. Judges are supposed to be unnacountable to cogrss and protected from the Legislative and Enforcement branches of the United States. I'm personally ashamed that congress could move so quiclky at the behest of "god" but could not move so swiftly to protect American Citizens from terrorism, both domestic and abroad. I fear that this, combined with other new idealism that is beginning to wear away our personal freedoms in the aftermath of Sept. 11th will override our commen sense. Though I applaud the circuit court of appeals' decision, I fear this is a badly chosen battle, and it so far is being used to target another specific minority group with the aim to make them appear less than human, and thus, unworthy of those inalienable human rights.

06-27-2002, 02:40 AM	#307
atheist_in_foxhole Guest Posts: n/a	Some bimbo on the Fox News morning show just said that she was "disturbed" that Newdow would raise his daughter as an atheist. She said that he shouldn't "force" it on her. Can you imagine the uproar if she had said that about a Xian parent raising a Xian child?!? C-Span is even worse. They're showing yesterday's Senate proceedings on the subject, and senator after senator is going on and on about how this is a country founded under god, we love god, god bless America, god doesn't like the ruling blah blah blah. That old fool Robert Byrd was practically foaming at the mouth about how the atheists are ruining his great country. At the end of his speech he yelled "blessed is the nation with the LORD as its god!" I fear that church/state separation may be a thing of the past. The fundies are pissed!!!

06-27-2002, 03:15 AM	#308
ashibaka Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Cloudy Water Posts: 443	They're still going on about it on Fox 30 min. later? Woah! Hopefully, it's a rerun O.o What I found most disturbing this morning was the video of all the senators saying the Pledge. "I pledge allegiance, etc, one nation, *UNDER GOD!!!*, invisible, etc etc." They put so much emphasis on it that it sounded like they were ready to murder all those un-American atheists.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.